Preposterous! Card game backs

Card back design, Red line is the Cut line

An initial concept for my cards, for the game Preposterous!

Overall I am satisfied with the card design, it is interesting and captures the correct look and feel. However there are a number of things I would improve upon if given the time.

Firstly although cogs are in keeping with the aesthetic of steampunk I do feel that they are a little over done, they also typecast a game in a way I do not wish to. With that in mind I will be looking into other things I can place on the back of this card to make it look good, or maybe even removing that element of the back of the card in its entirety.

Beyond that I want to look into fonts more and update the boarder for the title, it appears to be messy at this distance. However for the conceptualization I really like the overall feel and colour scheme.

I think I prefer the card design without the Cogs...

No cogs looks better?

Card sizes

The different types of cards I can have made

One of the actual card templates

One of the things I am quite set on using is playing cards for my tabletop game. With that in mind I have taken the size charts and a template for a playing card, which I can use to work out the size and dimensions of my playing cards. I have decided to go for a Poker sized card, they seem to be the standard and since there is no reason for me to not have the standard card size I believe it would be strange to do so.

Some work on rule systems

Notes on a dice system, card system and Archetype system

So far most of the design for these games comes down to the types of systems I will be using. The mechanics for a board game are crucial, for the most part they are the entire game. I have been trying to think of ways of utilizing dice without making the user resort to a multitude of mental maths to work out what is a pass or failure. For that reason I have created the system noted above. The system for suggestive image cards is useful however I think it might work better with single words and an image to go along with the concept. Finally the character archetype cards are a way of allowing the players to have  a personal goal to achieve without having to memorize all of the ways the game can be won, it also allows them a starting point from which they can create their characters.

I am happy with these systems so far, however they are only initial concepts, there is still a lot of testing to be done with them before a game playtest can be started.

 

 

 

 

Notes on a story system

Above is a series of notes for a possible story layout system, which would be decided each time the players sat down. Basically for a storytelling game I would want rules that would layout the overall plot for the players, meaning that they would not feel lost at any point during the game. The idea was that cards were randomly drawn, these cards gave players a starting point for every bit of the story. The players then had a set amount of slots which represented the story lengthy, by the end of the board they had to have reached a conclusion with the story comfortably. I am not sure about this system personally however it may be something I want to try out with the picto-cards.

Methods of delivey

There are many way to display a game such as this, however the method of deliver for everything from the rules to the actual suggestions for narrative are crucial.

A popular method of allowing small amounts of rules to be randomly given out is to print all of the rules or suggestions onto cards, these cards are then shuffled and dealt out randomly. This system has its benefits, it allows for a quick an easy method for giving out rules as they become relevant. Using this system also means that the player will constantly have a physical reminder of the rules they have access to. The only foreseeable issue with this system is that once a single player has a single card, no other player can really have that same card. This also means that players become tactful, knowing what cards the other players might have and acting accordingly. While this is not strictly a bad thing it does detract from the main aims of my game concept.

Another system that might be viable is the percentile dice roll. In this system the players would roll a selection of dice and compare the results to a table. The result on the table would then be explained in some way and the players would elaborate. This system has the benefit of being the same for every single player, allowing for multiples of a single result. It also will be easier for me to create tables of results for players to roll in and explain them once. However the rules will then be hidden away in a 'rulebook', something I want to avoid at all costs. I think that the main problem with this system will be that players will have to read all the rules. If the players have to sit down before a game and decipher the system I have failed.

My desire to create a game that incorporates the best parts of both casual and hard core role playing games has eliminated one of the choices for me. The concept of including a rule book in any real format is unacceptable for the type of game I am trying to create. I cannot imagine any one of my players having to trawl through a rulebook to find out how something works. I will attempt to remove this element as much as physically possible to make the game as accessible as possible, while at the same time attempting to maintain the desired level of depth and interest.

A song of ice and fire

(A song of ice and fire)

In order to continue my research into the topic of role playing games I picked up another 'Hard-core' Tabletop role-playing game, based on the fantasy novel series 'A game of thrones'. This game series is housed within a large rulebook, the usual system in which hard-core role-playing games are found. I have found that by reading the book the system includes some interesting systems that I have not seen in many other popular systems, these rules are however the only things that truly stand out in this game, beyond the aesthetic.


The first system I want to talk about is the generation of a family, along with that, a family history. All of these elements are randomly generated, which I believe is a rather brilliant way of allowing people to create a family history without having to think of everything themselves. It seems that players find it much more easy to justify an ambiguous piece of information then they find it to create a piece of information without a starting point. This is a great find for me, I will be able to use this information when I begin to create my own storytelling system. I have noticed this same problem many times in roleplaying games, it seems that people require some sort of starting point from which to create their narrative. This is useful knowledge as it allows me to pinpoint what I actually need to provide in my game.

This idea might account to the reason why there are so many players who believe that games, such as D&D, are in fact not about role-playing at all, but instead about combat. I must keep this in mind when I present the rules for my own world, if I do not strike a balance in how rules are presented then I will not send the correct message in my game.

Another part of this system which personally stood out to me is that it happens to include a rule set for something called 'intrigue', the idea being that when a player wishes to get another player character, or non-player character to do something they must use their own skills against the other player's resistance and see which person comes out superior. While many systems brush upon this idea, the song of ice and fire game makes a point of making the rules of social engagement as deep and involved as the rules of physical engagement  This gives the players a variety of different starting points in which to focus their characters, this helps to stop players on focusing all of their game-play into 'power gaming' instead allowing them to focus on the many different methods of conflict resolution.

Overall I think that the most important thing that the song of ice and fire system does for its players is that it gives them a varied starting point from which to play the game. While most games only allow the player a series of archetypal starting points and a complicated system for physical engagement  The systems within this role-playing game give the players archetypes, however they do not force you to pick one. They then show the player three different forms of conflict in equal measure, allowing the player to freely choose one to specialize within, or to angle their character towards.

A quick few tabletop game ideas

Just a quick list of some of the ideas I have had for tabletop games thus far.

Preposterous! A Gentleman's Boasting game!

The first game that I had an idea for was a Victorian era's game of boasts.
Basically players would first introduce themselves by taking three cards from the pile and incorporating what appears on the cards as key features of their own persons.
They would then continue to draw a hand of 6 cards and attempt to create the greatest boast they can, they will attempt to tell a story and other characters will attempt to poke holes in the story with probing questions.
The boaster must use the cards in his hand along with the cards that make up his character to back up his story, however he plays the proof cards face down.
If somebody believes he did not play the card he said they must call him on it, if he has played the card he said the accuser must draw a card, however if the boaster was using another card the boast has failed and that player must draw a new set of cards equal to every card he played +1
Once a boast is successful the player discards a card, along with all risked proof cards, never showing what they actually are.
The player to win is the one who gets rid of all his hand first.

Window wars

for kids trapped in a car for a long period of time there is the window war, players field equal amounts of troops with suction cups on their bases. They then attempt to wipe out the opposing army by use of a very basic set of rules, they use cards to move and shoot and each model has a preset number of times it can be shot, this games feasibility comes from the fact it can be played absolutely anywhere without hindrance!

Wasteland

A little more deep, this game comprises of a group of players acting like a group of survivors in a wasteland. Card traits are used to determine what sort of wasteland they are in, they then create their character stats and set off into the wastes. Their aim is to survive for a preset amount of time (until they find their winning parameter), however there does not need to be a ending to this particular game. The monsters are generated using the same system as the wasteland as is the locations allowing the world around them to be endlessly renewed, who knows how much pep you need to survive?

The storytelling system

Although I am unsure exactly how this game will work as of yet I intend to make my masters all about trying to find out!

The basics are simple however,
The system will be created using systems to randomize and suggest narrative to players.
Cards will be drawn at random with suggestions to help fuel people's minds
The point is to somehow create a role playing system focused on good character development instead of competition, I want to make a system that promotes good storytelling and not competition.
The systems will have to include character stats in one form or another, to suggest a difference in ability between player characters and situations, however there will not be ways to advance a character in any major way, I do not want my game to be about the destination and not the journey.

Nomad

A quick game that follows a tribe of nomadic wanderers as they try to find a new land to settle in, players must attempt to take their group to distant lands finding food for their swelling numbers, dealing with hazards and even politics as their members fluctuate and the nomadic life takes its toll.

A new idea

I have always felt that limitations exist within the world of computer games, whilst their ability to tell a linear story is absolutely limitless I feel that it is completely impossible to create a world without limits and a new story every single day for the player. That is why to me tabletop systems have always been so important, because in such games the only limits as to what can happen is completely up to the people enjoying the experience. However that feeling of freedom is only a pipe dream without some sort of boundaries, ironically these are all important to the process of creation.

I think what I want to do is make a tabletop system which perfectly merges storytelling and role playing. My hopes for this is to make a system that aids and encourages creation of believable characters and stories, I wish to eradicate the competitive aspect that games like this seem to work on and instead find a way to encourage people to make an evocative story together.

If I am able to create such a game there are quite a few avenues open to me to monopolise and produce it! Luckily it seems that tabletop systems are much easier to produce then computer games, some companies have even taken to aiding the process of self published tabletop games!

A first stop would be kick starter, having a kick starter project would allow me to gather the relevant funds to properly market my games and publish them.

Another possibility would be to personally raise all the funds required for marketing my game and get this American based company to market the game:
https://www.thegamecrafter.com/
This would allow me to get into production right away, which is very desirable

My final option and also an option I might undertake simply to have my idea rated by professionals would be Atlas games:
http://www.atlas-games.com/information_writer.php
At the moment Atlas games, publishers of some of the best card games and 'Once upon a time' are looking for new card based game ideas. Of which I imagine my game will fall into.

It seems astounding how many options are open to a games designer who wants to create their own tabletop board game. I do not think I will have any trouble getting a final product out once I have the appropriate funds to start things off, it might be worth thinking up other games at the same time since it is likely I will need to make more then just the one game.

Who knows where this new aim might take me?

Some more simple storytelling systems

(Once upon a time, Atlas games)

There are certain systems that seem to focus on the process of telling a story, they are beautiful but also few and far between. One of the most prominent of these systems appears to be 'once upon a time' the game of telling a fairytale. This system seems to be first and foremost about telling a story as a group, attempting to use all of the aspects the player draws and bringing the story to conclude in the way you want it to. While this game is truly about telling a story as a team, the competition is purely to motivate the players towards a conclusion and there is no need for the feeling of a power fantasy, this game is not a role-playing game. The difference I believe is that in this version of a storytelling game the player is not attached to a specific character. This means that the player does not become possessive of any one element and does not feel that their avatar needs to succeed above all others and be more powerful then all other characters. 

There must be a way around this issue, a way to make a story that focuses on a conflict and resolution between characters but does not become a power hungry race to the finish line. It seems that there is an issue players face with a story when they are given an avatar and attached to events, they become engrossed in 'winning' for their players while in once upon a time they are not themselves in the story.

There are in fact other games of this type that exist such as nanofictionry, the game of creating your own mini stories. However I find this game type to be a little bit too casual and lacking any serious depth, they seem to be the type of throwaway game designed to be played when meeting new people at a party.

 

Storytelling systems for all they are worth

In this post I will be looking into a more analog version of a storytelling system, the humble table top storytelling game.

(AD&D 1st ed cover art)

One of the most famous and successful of the tabletop game systems is the Dungeons and Dragons series of tabletop board games. This system has evolved its ethos, philosophy and playing styles throughout its long life time, as its players has also changed so has the game, slowly taking into account changes in popular culture as well as constantly adding to its own cosmology. It is interesting to examine how this rule set has changed throughout the years.

In the first creation of this rule set it was the job of the Dungeon master to know the rules of the world and system inside and out, the very complex rule set was left for him and him alone to master while the players would only need to know the rules for creating their character. The idea was obviously brought in to get around the complexity of the overall game, however since the rules were themselves complex the character creation process was also complex. As the game moved on in generations both the creation of characters and the the rules that the DM would know by comparison to the players changed to become more balanced, and overall, more complex.

The popularity of this game system is unquestionable, however if this system has a classification it would have to be 'hard-core'. The amount of research required to be even remotely familiar with the system is amazing, however people are still more then willing to plunder through all of the rule sets in all of the books to sit down at a table and be a part of the adventure.

My thoughts? As somebody who has played more then 3 incarnations of this game set for years I cannot help but have an opinion about this system. While it is a great game, with systems for advancement  combat, choice and role playing it also becomes quite difficult to call this a storytelling system. The sheer amount of rules in this game, coupled with systems such as advancement, seems to detract from the actual process of role-playing in this game, being replaced by a desire within each of the players to 'advance' by any means. This inclusion of an advancement system coupled with a rule set that focused on combat above all else makes this game less about telling a good story and more about a power fantasy being played out, this leads to most player character being little more then an avatar capable of doing anything without a single emotion if the player presses the correct button.

(World of darkness storytelling system, White wolf)

In contrast to the Dungeons and dragons storytelling system comes the World of darkness storytelling system, a different take on the same type of table top role playing game. In world of darkness the rules are simplified as much as possible to attempt to counter the pitfall that the player falls into in the D&D system. The overall premise of the game is that in the modern world there are supernatural creatures with their own society and agendas, these creatures are dangerous and misunderstood but of the time antagonistic.
While this system makes the rules easier to learn and follow, and even more so includes elements about the characters that give players an insight into how the character feels, it still falls into some pitfalls. While the players now focus more on what their characters would do or feel they still have a looming sense of a requirement for advancement. This detaches from the players desire to in some way follow through the story as a character, instead wanting only to achieve power without really thinking about a reason for this.

Since both of these systems are the most popular types of tabletop game I think it is important to examine why they are successful, or more accurately why people play these games. It seems that I have already mentioned the main reason why people play D&D, it seems to be built around a power fantasy that the game fulfills for the player, along with the ability to follow the slight narrative of a quest story. It seems that the same can be said for World of darkness also, while most of the game play is based upon the atmosphere and dealing with the conflicts the the game presents to you a large part for players seems to be planning for their character to become big and powerful then steaming towards that goal with no regard for anything other then expansion.

These systems are very near and dear to my heart, however I do not wish to fall into the same category they seem to when trying to create my own storytelling system.

Midcore is bullshit. An examination

Link to the article: http://gamasutra.com/blogs/KevinGliner/20130306/187983/MidCore_Is_Bullshit.php

After a long and drawn out process of research into mid-core I happened upon this article quite by accident, the information within is very concise and 'final' in its own way, agreeing with my own research into the subject.

It seems that although mid-core is a good for product specific engagement and commitment characteristics where it is valid, it is also used as demographic characteristics, where it is not valid. It is interesting to think that at the moment games are marketed as if only one type of people play casual games and another play hard core games, as an extension of that it seems to have been assumed that a totally different group of people will only play mid-core games. This is of course a false idea, people are diverse and play different types of games all the time depending on what directly takes their fancy.

"To make a game more casual is to make it more accessible; to make it hardcore is to make it more engaging. Good casual design increases a player’s willingness to play but does nothing to increase their desire to play. Good hardcore design improves a player’s desire to play but does nothing to increase their willingness to play." (Kevin Gliner, Gamasutra)

This article has critically summed up the issues that the concept of mid-core games face. While the idea of a game that sits between the engagement model of a casual game and a hard-core game is a great idea in theory it ill only create a new type of engagement for computer games, it will not actually work if used as a demographic for games.

With this information in mind I think I will, instead of seeking to create games that fall into this model, seek to create games which have an equal balance of engagement and accessibility.

Looking back on my blog

In retrospective of the posts that have gone by during my time on this course, I have found that not everything I began my work looking into is relevant any longer. I began with a very clear and narrow goal, to research what exactly mid-core was for a company, however the more I looked into it the less I seemed to discover about the 'mid-core' genre of gaming. I also took a dive into a great personal interest of mine, the classification and analysis of storytelling and as an extension of that how interactive mediums effect the process. After initially identifying the '7 basic plots' which helped me to see what a story 'needed' to be desirable, I began to examine popular examples of computer games that attempted to tell a story from different points of view, comparing avatars (1st person storytelling) to characters (3rd person storytelling). What I found from all of this research was that stories usually fell into 7 basic archetypes which although break them down into their basic components do not limit them from being infinitely creative, I also found that people play games for different reasons, 1st person storytelling is about having a world to explore and telling the story of your character yourself, while 3rd person is more about watching a character's story and subtly influencing it. While 1st person can be very immersible at times it is not really as emotionally tied to anything, people seem to find it more difficult to create a deep narrative and prefer to have one given to them and edit it slightly.

I also looked into the games industry at present in the form of the Dice presentations, the situation at CCP games at present and a few other internet sites. What I discovered from examining these things is that at present the industry has identified 'mid-core' as a new market to sell games to, however this seems short sighted and shallow as a classification. It appears to be a brilliant step forward for the games industry if this market is explored, because it will allow big companies to finally step out of their own pre-built 'boxes' which limited what a game could and couldn't be, create something new and exciting with a little less attention paid to a single demographic and take a risk. However the way the industry is currently talking about it it seems to have become another demographic, and while aiming a game at 30-50 yr olds might allow for a little more diversity it is kind of missing the point of what this system could actually mean, that games are better when they are new and inventive, not when they are built on market data and demographics.

What I now want to look into is:

• A final classification for the mid-core genre.
• Indie games a systems,
• Storytelling systems for all they are worth
• Where does my interest really lie?